Skip to comments.Social responsibility
Posted on 02/04/2012 10:31:53 PM PST by kathsua
As Hutchinson News subscribers, we were saddened to read its editorial in the Jan. 23 edition titled "Socially irresponsible." In the United States each day over 3,800 little boys and girls are legally murdered through abortion. These children are human beings like your own child or grandchild. We read that little human beings in China, India and other areas are killed after birth because they are the wrong gender or an economic burden, much as U.S. babies are aborted daily when considered an economic or lifestyle liability by their parent(s). Ironically it seems acceptable to abort a child before birth, but subject to criminal prosecution after birth, as evidenced when a young Kansas woman gave birth to a child and then immediately killed and stuffed it in a trash container.
Our understanding of social responsibility mandates doing good, not harm, being helpful versus harmful, making morally sound versus morally wrong decisions.
The editorial disdains Kansans' intellectual questioning on "when does life begin." The editorial implies that you (Kansans) are too smart to believe that a few cells days after conception that become the tiny, moving, kicking entity appearing on the doctor's ultrasound monitor is legally entitled to life by reason of its existence.
When you agree this most vulnerable of human beings is NOT morally entitled to life, then you will logically want to reject the Personhood Amendment that says it is.
Regardless, you should thank your mother for not ridding herself of - or totally avoiding - the uncomfortable "blob of tissue" kicking her incessantly and creating years of disruptions in her life that you represented.
I agree as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.